CUET Accessibility in Focus: Why Arunachal Pradesh’s Appeal Deserves National Attention

The debate surrounding the Common University Entrance Test (CUET) has often revolved around standardisation, accessibility and the promise of a unified gateway to higher education. Yet, for students living in India’s geographically remote regions, the issue is no longer merely academic. It is logistical, economic and deeply human. The recent appeal by Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Pema Khandu to the Union Education Ministry for the establishment of CUET examination centres within the state has brought this reality sharply into focus. In a letter addressed to Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, Khandu highlighted the severe hardships faced by students who are compelled to travel outside Arunachal Pradesh to appear for CUET 2026. His intervention may appear administrative on the surface, but it raises a much larger question about equity in India’s rapidly centralising educational framework.

The Geography of Disadvantage

For many students in metropolitan India, travelling to an examination centre may involve a short commute or a few hours' drive. In Arunachal Pradesh, however, the situation is dramatically different. The state’s mountainous terrain, sparse transport network and weather-dependent connectivity create challenges that are difficult to comprehend from an urban perspective.

A student from a remote district may need to undertake a multi-day journey involving road travel through difficult terrain, overnight stays and significant financial expenditure merely to sit for a national-level entrance examination. Families often accompany students, further escalating the economic burden. In a region where household incomes may already be stretched, these additional costs become formidable barriers to educational aspiration.

Khandu’s concern, therefore, is not simply about convenience. It is about ensuring that students from frontier regions are not placed at a structural disadvantage before the examination even begins.

The Hidden Cost of Centralised Testing

India’s move towards centralised entrance examinations was designed to create uniformity and transparency in admissions. CUET, introduced as a common platform for undergraduate admissions to central universities and other participating institutions, sought to reduce disparities arising from different board examination systems.

However, centralisation often produces unintended consequences when regional disparities are not adequately addressed. A standardised system assumes a level playing field in infrastructure, internet access, transport and institutional capacity. That assumption rarely holds in remote states such as Arunachal Pradesh.

Students in the Northeast frequently confront challenges that extend beyond academics. Long travel distances, uncertain transport availability, accommodation difficulties and psychological stress can significantly affect performance. Competitive examinations already generate immense pressure; adding the burden of exhausting travel only intensifies the anxiety.

This is particularly concerning because educational mobility remains one of the most significant pathways for social and economic advancement in the region. When access itself becomes uneven, the principle of meritocracy begins to weaken.

Education and Inclusion in the Northeast

The Northeast has historically battled issues of connectivity and institutional access. Over the past decade, however, the region has seen growing investment in educational infrastructure, digital governance and national integration initiatives. Arunachal Pradesh, in particular, has attempted to strengthen its education and health sectors while expanding opportunities for young people.

In this context, the demand for local CUET centres reflects a broader aspiration: inclusion within the national educational ecosystem without forcing students to overcome disproportionate geographic barriers.

Importantly, Khandu’s appeal does not reject national examinations. Instead, it seeks a more region-sensitive implementation of them. The Chief Minister reiterated that the state government is fully prepared to provide logistical and administrative support to the National Testing Agency (NTA) for conducting CUET examinations locally.

That assurance significantly strengthens the argument. The issue is no longer one of feasibility alone but of prioritisation.

Lessons from NEET

Khandu also pointed to the successful conduct of NEET examinations at multiple centres across Arunachal Pradesh in recent years. This precedent is important because it demonstrates that large-scale national examinations can indeed be administered effectively within the state.

If NEET infrastructure and coordination mechanisms already exist, expanding or adapting that framework for CUET appears both practical and achievable. The challenge, therefore, is unlikely to be insurmountable from an operational standpoint.

The argument also gains urgency because CUET affects a vast number of undergraduate aspirants across streams. Unlike specialised entrance examinations, CUET serves students seeking admission into a wide range of disciplines, making accessibility even more critical.

Mental Well-being and Academic Performance

One of the more significant aspects of Khandu’s letter was the emphasis on students’ physical and mental well-being. This observation deserves closer attention.

Educational discourse in India often focuses heavily on rankings, cut-offs and institutional prestige, while overlooking the emotional and psychological realities faced by students. Travelling long distances under stressful conditions, staying in unfamiliar cities and navigating financial uncertainty can severely affect concentration and confidence during examinations.

Students from remote areas may already feel culturally and linguistically marginalised in competitive environments dominated by urban centres. When examination systems inadvertently amplify these disadvantages, educational inequality deepens.

Creating accessible examination centres is therefore not merely an administrative reform; it is also a mental health intervention.

The Policy Dimension

The issue raised by Arunachal Pradesh could have implications for other geographically challenging regions across India. States with hilly terrain, low population density or limited transport infrastructure may face similar problems in national examination logistics.

As India continues to expand centralised testing systems, policymakers may need to rethink what accessibility truly means. Availability of an exam centre on paper does not automatically translate into genuine access. Distance, travel time, cost and connectivity are equally important determinants.

A more decentralised and region-sensitive examination model may ultimately be necessary. This does not imply compromising examination standards. Rather, it means recognising that equity sometimes requires differentiated implementation strategies.

The National Testing Agency has significantly expanded its operational reach in recent years, but the growing scale of national examinations also demands more nuanced planning. Including additional district headquarters and remote locations as examination centres could become an important step towards educational inclusivity.

A Question of Educational Justice

At its core, the Arunachal Pradesh government’s appeal raises a fundamental question: should geography determine educational opportunity?

For decades, students from remote and border regions have had to work harder merely to access the same opportunities available elsewhere. National examinations are intended to democratise admissions, but they risk reinforcing inequality if infrastructural realities are ignored.

The symbolism of local CUET centres also matters. Establishing centres within Arunachal Pradesh would send a message that students in frontier states are not peripheral participants in India’s higher education system but equal stakeholders in it.

This becomes especially important at a time when the country is emphasising national integration, digital inclusion and educational reform. Access cannot remain concentrated in urban clusters if those reforms are to retain credibility.

Beyond One State

While the immediate discussion concerns Arunachal Pradesh, the broader lesson extends nationwide. Educational reform in India must increasingly move beyond policy announcements and examine implementation realities on the ground.

A truly inclusive examination system must account for India’s immense geographical diversity. Students from remote Himalayan districts, tribal belts and border regions should not have to undertake disproportionately difficult journeys merely to sit for an examination that promises equal opportunity.

The call for CUET centres within Arunachal Pradesh is therefore not a regional demand alone. It is a reminder that educational equity requires more than standardisation; it requires sensitivity to lived realities.

If India’s national entrance examinations are to fulfil their promise of democratising higher education, accessibility must be treated not as an afterthought but as a foundational principle.